By Ron Hiram :My prior
articles focused on master limited partnerships ("MLPs"), an
area I have long followed and invested in. My concern with overly
concentrating my portfolio in MLPs has led me to examine mortgage
Real Estate Investment Trusts ("mREITs") as an alternative yield
producing vehicle. Indeed, the current dividend yields on some
mREITs exceed the distribution yields on many MLPs including El
Paso Pipeline Partners ( EPB ), Enterprise
Products Partners ( EPD ), Energy Transfer
Partners ( ETP ),
Kinder Morgan Energy Partners ( KMP ), Plains All
American Pipeline ( PAA ), and Williams
Partners (WPZ).
I have been evaluating Annaly Capital Management, Inc. (NLY) and
American Capital Agency Corp. (AGNC). This report focuses on NLY,
the largest mREIT listed on the NYSE with a market cap of ~$16.7
billion and assets on the balance sheet as of 6/30/12 totaling
~$128 billion. NYL owns, manages, and finances a portfolio of real
estate related investments, including mortgage pass-through
certificates, collateralized mortgage obligations ("CMOs"),
callable debentures and other securities backed by pools of
mortgage loans.
Total returns generated through 8/24/12 (based on the $17.16
closing price) are summarized in Table 1 below:
From | Share Price Change thru 8/24/12 | Dividends thru 8/24/12 | Total Return | Approx. Total Return % |
12/31/2008 | $1.45 | $13.13 | $14.58 | 13% |
12/31/2009 | ($0.19) | $6.20 | $6.01 | 10% |
12/31/2010 | ($0.76) | $3.54 | $2.78 | 7% |
12/31/2011 | $1.20 | $1.10 | $2.30 | 15% |
Table 1
Past returns appear to be attractive and the current yield is
enticing at 12.8%. However, investors familiar with my approach know the first question I ask is
what portion, if any, of the dividends I am receiving are really
"earned". I am leery of investing in entities (publicly traded
partnerships or companies) that pay dividends, or fund
distributions, by issuing debt or additional equity. In taking a
closer look at NLY I encountered difficulties similar to those I
faced when reviewing the performance of MLPs. Since money is
fungible and the NLY annual report runs over 100 pages that are
frequently hard to understand, ascertaining whether you are
genuinely receiving a yield on your money (rather than a return of
your money) can be a complicated endeavor.
Several examples can illustrate the complexities. The bulk of
NLY's assets consist of mortgage-backed securities and debentures
issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae, and of corporate
debt (together, "Investment Securities"). These are classified for
accounting purposes as available-for-sale and are reported at fair
value with unrealized gains and losses excluded from earnings and
reported as a separate component of stockholders' equity. The
effect can be dramatic, as seen in 3Q 2011 when reported losses
(realized and unrealized) amounted to 38.8% of the average equity
and NLY's net loss for the period amounted to ~$926 million. But
there were $1.1 billion of unrealized gains in that quarter that
showed up only on the balance sheet, not the income statement.
Another example is the subjectivity involved in determining net
interest margin, an important performance indicator. Beginning June
30, 2011, NLY reclassified "interest expense on swaps" to "realized
gains (losses) on swaps" thus changing the way net interest margin
is calculated, Therefore, I find NLY's net interest margins,
reported earnings, earnings per share and earnings multiples to be
of limited value as indicators of performance or of ability to
generate sustainable dividends.
The treatment of borrowing and lending via repurchase and
reverse repurchase agreements ("repos") is yet another example. NLY
reports cash flow from these activities as cash flows from
operating activities when they are performed by RCap (NLY's wholly
owned broker-dealer subsidiary), but when they are not performed by
RCap, they appear as cash flow from investing activities. Therefore
I find NLY's distinctions between the various categories on the
cash flow statement (i.e., operations, investments and financing)
to be of limited value in understanding NLY's ability to generate
sustainable dividends.
In light of these issues, I developed my own definition of
distributable cash flow ("DCF"), thus creating a quantitative
standard that I view as an indicator of NLY's ability to generate
cash flow at a level that can sustain or support an increase in
quarterly distribution rates. The definition is relatively simple:
net income + amortization (a non-cash item), + losses (or minus
gains) on assets & liabilities (also non-cash items), less cash
used for working capital. The results for the past 4 years are
outlined in Table 2 below:
12 months ending: | 12/31/11 | 12/31/10 | 12/31/09 | 12/31/08 |
Net income | 344 | 1,267 | 1,961 | 346 |
Amortization | 808 | 669 | 256 | 104 |
Losses (gains) on assets & liabilities | 1,707 | 139 | (448) | 780 |
Cash used for working capital | (49) | (2) | (146) | (123) |
DCF | 2,810 | 2,074 | 1,623 | 1,107 |
Dividends paid | (2,041) | (1,599) | (1,269) | (975) |
DCF excess over dividends paid | 769 | 475 | 354 | 132 |
DCF coverage of dividends | 1.38 | 1.30 | 1.28 | 1.14 |
Table 2: Figures in $ Millions except coverage
ratios
Results for 2Q 2012, 2Q 2011, the first half of 2012 and of 2011
(1H12 and 1H11) are outlined in Table 3 below:
Period: | 2Q12 | 2Q11 | 1H12 | 1H11 |
Net income | (91) | 121 | 811 | 821 |
Amortization | 311 | 128 | 601 | 304 |
Losses (gains) on assets & liabilities | 541 | 462 | 86 | 261 |
DCF | 762 | 710 | 1,497 | 1,386 |
Dividends paid | (541) | (503) | (1,098) | (911) |
DCF excess over dividends paid | 221 | 207 | 400 | 474 |
DCF coverage of dividends | 1.41 | 1.41 | 1.36 | 1.52 |
Table 3: Figures in $ Millions except coverage
ratios
Losses (gains) on assets and liabilities in Tables 2 and 3 are
comprised of realized and unrealized gains and losses on mortgage
backed securities, debentures, equity securities, interest rate
swaps. The losses and gains are added and subtracted, respectively,
because they are non-cash items.
As part of my analysis, I also created a simplified cash flow
statement designed to shed light on the sustainability of the
dividends by, for example, grouping together and netting out
numerous line items that deal with gains and losses that are
reported in the income statement but are non-cash items (and
therefore reversed out in the cash flow statement). I also separate
cash generation from cash consumption and group together and net
out numerous line items that deal with cash outflows for assets
(e.g., acquiring assets outright or receiving assets as collateral
and lending against them) and cash generated by assets (e.g.,
selling assets outright or giving assets as collateral and
borrowing against them). This reduces the over 50 line items in
NLY's cash flow statement to just a few. Results for the past 4
years are outlined in Table 4 below:
Simplified Cash Flow Statement:
12 months ending: | 12/31/11 | 12/31/10 | 12/31/09 | 12/31/08 |
DCF excess over dividends paid | 769 | 475 | 354 | 132 |
Proceeds from assets, net | - | - | 90 | - |
Convertible Senior Notes issued | - | 582 | - | - |
Shares issued | 5,816 | 1,331 | 147 | 2,244 |
Other cash generated, net | 5 | - | 5 | 73 |
| | 6,590 | 2,387 | 595 | 2,449 |
| | | | | |
Payments for assets, net | (5,879) | (3,600) | - | (1,643) |
Other cash used, net | - | (9) | - | - |
| | (5,879) | (3,609) | - | (1,643) |
| | | | | |
Net increase in cash & cash equiv. | 712 | (1,222) | 595 | 805 |
Table 4: Figures in $ Millions
In these simplified cash flow statements proceeds from, and
payments for, assets contain numerous types of netted items,
including: a) repos and reverse repos; b) securities borrowed and
loaned; c) securities purchased and sold; d) principal payments on,
or maturities of, securities owned; e) equity investments
(including investments in affiliates). Of course, the net increase
(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents ties to the company's
financial statements.
Results for 2Q 2012, 2Q 2011, 1H12 and 1H11 are outlined in
Table 5:
Period: | 2Q12 | 2Q11 | 1H12 | 1H11 |
DCF excess over dividends paid | 221 | 207 | 400 | 474 |
Cash generated by working capital | 88 | 79 | 112 | 34 |
Convertible Senior Notes issued | 728 | - | 728 | - |
Preferred shares issued | 291 | - | 291 | - |
| Common shares issued | 4 | 458 | 6 | 3,403 |
Other cash generated, net | 1 | 1 | - | 2 |
| | 1,332 | 746 | 1,536 | 3,913 |
| | | | | |
Payments for assets, net | (1,341) | (701) | (1,595) | (3,794) |
Other cash used, net | - | - | (11) | - |
| | (1,341) | (701) | (1,606) | (3,794) |
| | | | | |
Net increase in cash & cash equiv. | (8) | 45 | (70) | 119 |
Table 5: Figures in $ Millions
Roughly speaking, on a net basis over the 4-year period of
2008-2011, NLY generated ~$8 billion, raised a further $10.1
billion via equity and debt (of which only $0.6 billion from debt
via issuance of senior convertible notes) and used the total of
$18.1 billion to increase its portfolio ($12.2 billion) and to pay
dividends ($5.9 billion).
For the 6-month period ending 6/30/12, NLY generated ~$1.5
billion, raised ~ $1 billion via issuance of senior notes and
preferred shares, and generated ~$182 million by reducing working
capital (including cash balances). It used the total of $2.7
billion to increase its portfolio (~$1.6 billion) and to pay
dividends (~$1.1 billion).
NLY continues to demonstrate an ability to generate cash
sufficient to both fund dividends and supplement funds raised via
issuance of equity and debt in order to increase the size of the
investment portfolio.
Clearly the 12.8% yield does not come without risks and past
performance may not be a good indicator of future performance. NLY
has benefited from the accommodative stance of the Federal Reserve
Bank which, for the past several years, has resulted in a
relatively steep yield curve, albeit at low absolute rates. The
shape of yield curve and amount of leverage (the bulk of which is
generated via the repurchase markets) are the key drivers of return
for NLY which relies primarily on short-term borrowings to acquire
Investment Securities with long-term maturities. Accordingly,
profitability may be adversely affected if short-term interest
rates increase or if the spread narrows. NLY's Form 10-K lists
numerous other risks, including the health of its Chairman, CEO and
President.
I look at several risk and performance parameters:
Leverage : Management has been keeping leverage
at the low end of its 8 to 12 leverage band since 2007. Reduced
leverage reduces both interest rate risk and systemic risk (e.g.,
crisis in Europe, regulatory pressures for mortgage finance reform,
future of Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae, SEC review of the exemption
granted to mortgage REITs from the 1940 Act which would cause them
to be considered as mutual funds). However, in 2012 leverage has
increased:
Period: | 2Q12 | 1Q12 | 4Q11 | 3Q11 | 2Q11 | 1Q11 |
total assets / total equity | 6.83 | 6.50 | 5.91 | 6.09 | 6.16 | 6.60 |
total debt / total equity | 7.03 | 6.57 | 5.98 | 6.16 | 6.24 | 6.69 |
Sensitivity to changes in interest rates : data
provided by management is outlined in Table 6 below. It indicates a
limited exposure to changes in interest rates as of 6/30/12:
Change in Interest Rate (1) | Projected % Change in Economic Net Interest Income (2) | Projected % Change in Portfolio Value, with Effect of Interest
Rate Swaps |
-75 Basis Points | 4.54% | 0.22% |
-50 Basis Points | 2.80% | 0.04% |
-25 Basis Points | 1.12% | 0.02% |
Base Interest Rate | - | - |
+25 Basis Points | -1.13% | -0.09% |
+50 Basis Points | -2.78% | -0.27% |
+75 Basis Points | -3.91% | -0.57% |
- Assuming movement is in the entire yield curve
- . Including interest expense on interest rate swaps
Table 6
However, this may not be a reliable indication of exposure to
changes in interest rates for two major reasons: first, the
assumption that the entire yield curve moves in tandem is not as
bad a scenario for NLY as a further flattening (to say nothing of
inversion) of the curve. Second, management's estimates speed of
prepayment vary at each interest rate level and we have no way of
knowing how conservative or aggressive these assumptions are.
Prepayment speeds as reflected by the Constant
Prepayment Rate ("CPR"): In the aggregate, mortgage backed
securities purchased by NLY at a premium exceed those it purchased
at a discount. Therefore, the faster the prepayment rate the
greater the loss. While CPR rates have increased significantly vs.
6/30/11, they appear to be leveling off:
Period: | 2Q12 | 1Q12 | 4Q11 | 3Q11 | 2Q11 | 1Q11 |
CPR rate | 19% | 19% | 22% | 18% | 11% | 17% |
Duration: as of 12/31/11 duration was at a
short 1.2 years. Duration is the length of time required to recoup
losses caused by a percent increase in short and long-term interest
rates (losses are recouped by reinvesting at higher interest
rates). Giving effect to swap transactions, NLY reported average
duration (0.4) years as of 12/31/11. The negative number indicates
that, giving effect to swap transactions, the duration of NLY's
assets is shorter than that of its liabilities. An update as of
6/30/12 was not provided.
Net interest spread: data provided by
management indicates net interest spread has been declining since
6/30/11:
Period: | 2Q12 | 1Q12 | 4Q11 | 3Q11 | 2Q11 | 1Q11 |
Net spread | 1.54% | 1.71% | 1.71% | 2.07% | 2.45% | 2.16% |
Management seeks to mitigate the effect of changes in interest
rates by matching adjustable rate assets with variable rate
borrowings and therefore swaps its fixed rate liabilities via
agreements whereby it receives fixed rate payments and makes
floating rate payments. Management noted in the its 2Q12 report
that the weighted average rate it pays rate on these interest swaps
will continue to decline "…for the immediately foreseeable
periods…" as a result of interest rate swaps with higher pay rates
maturing or being terminated and the replacement of such swaps with
interest rate swaps with lower pay rates.
Book value per share:
Period: | 2Q12 | 1Q12 | 4Q11 | 3Q11 | 2Q11 | 1Q11 |
Book value | 16.23 | 16.18 | 16.06 | 16.22 | 14.19 | 15.59 |
In summary, the bulk of investor returns have come from
dividends rather than capital appreciation. Looking ahead, I don't
expect this to change. In fact, if management's measurement of net
interest margin is correct, the current yield on average interest
earning assets (3.04%), net interest margin (1.54%) and leverage
(~7) indicate a return on equity (and hence sustainable
distributions) of about 12.3%, which is slightly below the 12.8%
current yield. This very rough, back-of-the-envelope, calculation
indicates that for distributions to be sustainable under current
conditions, and assuming no reduction in the investment portfolio,
they would have to be reduced from the current rate of $0.55 per
quarter to ~$0.53 per quarter. Should this modest reduction occur
and be accompanied by a sharp decline in share price, a buying
opportunity may develop. As always, investors should perform their
own due diligence and assess their individual tolerance for risk
before buying or selling the shares.
Disclosure: I am long [[NLY]], [[EPD]],
[[EPB]], [[WPZ]], [[PAA]], [[ETP]]. I wrote this article myself,
and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation
for it. I have no business relationship with any company whose
stock is mentioned in this article.
See also Annaly: How mREITs Make Money And The Case For A
Dividend Increase on seekingalpha.com